Dispatches from the 10th Crusade

Welcome and Posting Rules

Welcome, dear reader, to What’s Wrong
with the World, another web-log with grand pretensions. Something
is decidedly wrong with the world, and our brash assertion is that we
know a part of what that is. This site is a successor to Enchiridion
Militis, and we extend our thanks to Josh Trevino for bringing us
together, though his hiatus from online activity means that, sadly, he
will not be joining us here.

The phrase enchiridion militis refers to book by Erasmus
which, translated, still captures our purpose: A Handbook for the
Christian Soldier. Please take a moment to read our Statement of Purpose and peruse our Contributors list.

The reader is welcome – nay, encouraged – to join the
discussion by posting comments; however, he is reminded of his position
as a guest here, and urged to keep his comments within the
bounds of a decent respect for the opinions of his hosts. We will not
tolerate: truculent atheists, irascible Liberals, intransigent
Islamists, ill- tempered radicals, petulant nihilists, brassbound
freethinking polemicists, cantankerous evolutionists, and the like; nor
will we shed a tear for any of the above who, when banned, feel they
have been grievously wronged. All of the above, however, are welcome
– minus the adjectives.

Neither will we abide personal insults, threats, imprecations,
breaches of privacy, or profanity of any kind. The reader is well-
advised, if in doubt, to err on the side of caution.

The doctrines of orthodox Christianity shall not be scoffed at; while
the doctrines of orthodox Liberalism will be abused and derided with
impunity. One proposition, which has nearly achieved the status of
Liberal doctrine, is that Islam shall be shielded from public criticism.
This, too, we emphatically cast aside.

As Bob Dylan said, “we can
hear the night watchman click his flashlight, ask himself if it’s
him or them that’s insane” – except that here,
there is no such ambivalence; it’s them that’s
insane.

If the reader suspects that this amounts to a “we’re
right, you’re wrong” policy, he may well be right. But let
him rest assured that respect and propriety will not return void. With
our adversaries we can still hope to achieve a courteous clarity of
disagreement, and even a mutual admiration: but this can only be done in
forthright civility.

Forthright and Civil, then, will be our watchwords: we will be
forthright and adversarial commenters will be civil.